Part 4- Manipulation through "authorities"

Part 4

Elena obviously falls into Ton’s trap and tries to look at the “doctrines” he presents to continue being a good sport!!! She naively states and asks Ton:

65. Elena - April 8, 2010

Thanks Ton for your observation, I will carefully meditate on it.

67. Elena - April 8, 2010

Ton: “anthropocentric humanism is at the root of the problem, from your current perspective you may not see it but inherent in this doctrine you’re preaching is human egotism writ large. there are alternatives to ‘ego’ based biases…. as a philosopher, scholar and ‘author’ you might want to do more research — for example, for a critique of the ‘ego-logical’ perspective see: rozak, naess, fisher, metzner, mckenna, et al, and see whitehead’s process-relational theory.

“What Humanist theories do not allow for is the fact that a system of ethics formulated from a human perspective may not be entirely accurate; humans are not the centre of reality. Spinoza argued that we tend to assess things wrongly in terms of their usefulness to us. Spinoza reasoned that if we were to look at things objectively we would discover that everything in the universe has a unique value…. a human-centred or anthropocentric ethic is not an accurate depiction of reality, there is a bigger picture….””

Sounds great Ton, would you share what you understand as the bigger picture? and what you’ve understood about what I am saying just to make sure that we’re on the same platform?

68. Elena - April 8, 2010

Ton, just to clarify, I am asking because what I am saying is so new to me that I hadn’t realized it was all that structured for you to come with this observation so it would be very helpful if you tell me what it is that you are understanding since it seems to be so clear to you.

NOTE:

By this time Elena was beginning to realize that the discussion wasn’t even and that no matter what she said was taken and  turned against her but kept trying to participate. She should have obviously stopped as soon as the ridiculing began but she so strongly wanted to participate that she didn’t, she tried to keep being a “good sport”.

What Elena is asking Ton is to be concrete about what he understands she is saying, what his bigger picture is and to see if they are actually on the same platform to dialogue not to agree but he answers:

Note by Elena: when I look at this Ton it is really very sad. Of course you’ll just say I am playing self pity and keep denigrating my condition as you like but the more you deny to look at it for what it is the more you’ll separate your selves into denial of what actually happened. You think I am doing this analysis to attack you but I am actually doing it to defend myself from your attacks for I should have been defended by everyone present, but no one did. At least I can defend myself. It’s very helpful for my well being.

69. ton - April 8, 2010

elena,

i think we’re definitely not “on the same platform” — but that’s ok. no need to be sarcastic, clarity is an ongoing lifelong process, we both know that, and no need for disingenuousness,

NOTE:

Negation of being on the same platform or having any chance for it!

And then the “no need to be sarcastic” although he’s been sarcastic all along!

But doesn’t answer the question and moves on to the following:

if you truly meant what you said, and were to “carefully meditate on it” then there would be no reason for me to elaborate

NOTE: Can you see how he again adopts the position of superiority in which it is Elena who is inferior in not having meditated long enough? He again attacks Elena personally and denies to answer the question and continues:

(a hint: when you “carefully meditate” too quickly, you miss the point).

NOTE: again accentuating that Elena has missed something, that she’s not meditated long enough on the doctrines he is supposed to present but is in fact not presenting.

By this time the whole conversation has centered around Elena not being good enough to understand Ton who is way superior to Elena and has presented her with a number of authors that Elena supposedly should read because Ton is in no way willing to present his own understanding openly and frankly.

The manipulation couldn’t be more obvious: it circles precisely around images of authority. Ton pretends to undermine Elena by presenting her with names of “authorities” that Elena doesn’t know and because she doesn’t know, she simply is not good enough to affirm what she’s saying that Ton is unwilling to discuss.

It is a vicious circle aimed at dis-acknowledging Elena and everything Elena says without actually addressing anything of what Elena has said or Elena herself.
*